Bill Sykes' Newsletter from America.
(September 2002)
An ex-Brit gives his views-(without fear
or favor)---of the American Scene
The diminishing coalition.
 Most
European countries have backed off at this time from supporting
the initiation of a war against Iraq, (rightly or wrongly---only
history will tell), due to their questioning of proof that
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and whether Saddam
Hussein would be prepared to use them.
There is practically no support from the Middle Eastern
countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and even Kuwait,
with the only country urging the United States to attack
Iraq being Israel. Wonder why?
Israel intelligence agencies say they have gathered evidence
that Iraq is accelerating its efforts to produce biological
and chemical weapons of mass destruction. What if they are
right and Saddam Hussein intends to use such weapons?
 This
brings me to the point of a report which states that George
Bush’s case for war against Saddam Hussein has been
undermined by recent disclosures that the United States,
when Ronald Reagan was President in the late 1980s, (apparently
in support of Iraq’s war against Iran), closed a blind
eye to Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iranian
citizens. The United States support of Iraq apparently was
aimed at trying to stop the spread of the Islamic revolution
to the oil rich Persian Gulf states.
Another report states that a cooperative economic plan
is currently being discussed between Russia and Iraq in
the sum of $40 to $80 billion dollars, (depending upon which
report you study). If this pact comes to fruition, it certainly
will strain relations between Russia and the United States
if the United States initiates a go it alone attack on Iraq.
 The
Russian/Iraqi pact apparently envisions cooperation in the
fields of oil, irrigation, agriculture, railroads, other
means of transportation, and electrical energy. Shall we
say that Mr. Bush’s close friend Mr. Putin is not
as friendly as Mr. Bush thought he was, but he certainly
would appear to be more politically astute.
Certain members of the Administration, and some leading
media spokespersons, are trying to associate the reluctance
of the detractors for a war against Iraq to be similar to
the reluctance of the nations of Europe to stop German aggression
in the late 1930s.
 I
seem to recollect that Britain, France and other European
allies entered the war against Germany on the 3rd of September
1939, and that the American public in general were very
much against sending American troops to fight in war which
they believed was not their problem, until that terrible
day of the 7th of December 1941 when the Japanese attack
on Pearl Harbor propelled the United States into the second
world war.
The cost of going to War.
For comparison purposes, the cost to the United States
in the 1991 war against Saddam Hussein, (to protect American
oil interests in Kuwait), was approximately $60b, (give
or take a few billion), but as the former allies contributed
a further $50b, it can be estimated that if the Americans
decide to go-it-alone in a war against Iraq, it will cost
the American public well in excess of $100 billion dollars
and will not be such a quick and decisive action as the
previous encounter experienced in Gulf War One.
Britain may provide some troops, and there may be limited
assistance from other sources. !!!
 The
cost in human life, civilian and military cannot be calculated,
but could be enormous. Which brings us back to the question
of “Liquid Gold”.
In the event of a war against Iraq, Saddam Hussein could
possibly attack neighboring oil producing countries in retaliation,
which would certainly worry Wall Street and create a serious
situation of unease amongst the world investment communities
which would certainly discourage economic expansion for
whatever period the war continued and cause an aftermath
of monetary dislocation worldwide for several years.
|
